{"resolved":true,"match_type":"uuid","source_type":"original_book","book_id":"24410bf1-91f1-4e6b-9613-e64f0132d341","title":"The Stack On Software and Sovereignty","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"9780262029575","requested_by":"printed_page","book":{"source_type":"original_book","book_id":"24410bf1-91f1-4e6b-9613-e64f0132d341","id":"24410bf1-91f1-4e6b-9613-e64f0132d341","uuid":"24410bf1-91f1-4e6b-9613-e64f0132d341","title":"The Stack On Software and Sovereignty","normalized_title":"thestackonsoftwareandsovereignty","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"9780262029575","isbns":["9780262029575"],"parsed":true,"ai_readable":true,"document_type":"book","page_count":517,"navigation_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/24410bf1-91f1-4e6b-9613-e64f0132d341","title_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/title/The%20Stack%20On%20Software%20and%20Sovereignty","fixed_page_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/24410bf1-91f1-4e6b-9613-e64f0132d341/page/{printed_page}","path_api_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/book/24410bf1-91f1-4e6b-9613-e64f0132d341/page/{printed_page}","read_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/read/24410bf1-91f1-4e6b-9613-e64f0132d341","page_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/24410bf1-91f1-4e6b-9613-e64f0132d341/page","search_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/24410bf1-91f1-4e6b-9613-e64f0132d341/search"},"page":{"printed_page":283,"pdf_page":299,"physical_index":299,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"3159cabf34cd3e40cbf155643f0821ef87d2cb3cd7bd0158d50905ddc1b2390c"},"chapter":"Fheck The Stack |On Software and Sovereignty Benjamin H. Bratton","content":"National Security Agency has something to say about all that geolocative data. In short, the roads themselves may be where some of the most contentious and important friction between emergent Cloud Polis and the state over the geography of jurisdiction will play out. As discussed in the Cloud chapter, the interweaving of multiple and incongruous sovereign claims often hinges on how emergent platforms problematize and repurpose existing platforms (such as the intercontinental highway network and its federal stewards), and by how existing platforms steer that emergence toward its own publics.\n\nMoreover, the psychological anguish of relinquishing driver status would likely ensure whatever policies are initially put in place may be irrational and absurd. Today the populist backlash against smart meters installed in residences as end points of more efficiently managed energy networks is nothing compared to the resistance (both legitimate and delusional) that will meet the sunsetting of human-driven automobiles. In important ways, however, the moral high ground may be with the robots. Gary Marcus writes, “ Eventually (though not yet) automated vehicles will be able to drive better, and more safely than you can; no drinking, no distraction, better reflexes, and better awareness (via networking) of other vehicles. Within two or three decades the difference between automated driving and human driving will be so great you may not be legally allowed to drive your own car, and even if you are allowed, it would be immoral of you to drive, because the risk of you hurting yourself or another person will be far greater than if you allowed a machine to do the work. ” <sup>61</sup> Be that as it may, and despite the systemic benefits to humans, there will be teeth-gnashing animosity to the call for humans to abdicate so much of the User position to the apparatus. It ’ s not quite a Copernican trauma, but it will be taken as an insult. In relation to infrastructural systems, the position of the User is one of at least partial or provisional sovereignty (per the discussion in the City chapter of what informal territories, physical and virtual envelopes, provide to Users in motion across state geographies). The interweaving of human and nonhuman bodies and User subjectivities is a radical extension and amplification of practical sovereignties (i.e., extending the freedom to move and ensuring against accidental death). For many, however, it will be seen instead as an unholy and inacceptable relinquishing and diminishing of self.\n\nThat said, there is no doubt that a technological assemblage such as this, drawing on all layers of The Stack at once, perched on uncertain and ineffectual regulatory concepts and methods, installed unevenly through often dysfunctional urban fabrics, carrying our very persons in its clutches (and so on), will also innovate massive new genres of catastrophe (though with over a million people killed in cars every year, those catastrophes will have to pass a high bar to be worse than those they ’ ve displaced). They mirror the vulnerabilities of The Stack as a whole, vulnerabilities of centralization and standardization, of universalization and interconnectedness, of energy breaches and code failures. A recent demonstration showed just how easy (fun and scary) it is to commandeer today ’ s cars by hacking their electronic control units: turning off brakes, indicating a full tank when empty, indicating the wrong vehicle speed, initiating the self-parking system while driving at 60 mph, sounding the horn randomly. <sup>62</sup> The implications for what might be possible when similar Fluxus mayhem is orchestrated at the scale of an entire City boggles the mind. As Marcus puts it, “ These driverless cars will be safer, but when accidents do happen, they may be on the scale of airline disasters ” though he may be off by an order of magnitude or two, depending on how deep and pervasive the Cloud vehicle platform does or does not become.\n\nUser Layer\n\n283","previous_page":282,"next_page":284}